February 09, 2026 | Legacy and Legal , Incidents and Reports
Request Number: FOI/16453
Category: Legacy and Legal - Incidents and Reports
Subject: Information on Named Individuals
Request and Answer:
Your request for information has now been considered. In respect of Section 1(1)(a) of the Act we can confirm that the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) does hold some information to which your request relates and this is being provided to you.
Further, in relation to the names of the suspects, Police Service of Northern Ireland is providing an NCND response and will explain this further in the response below.
We have also provided you with links to guidance issued by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) which we have followed in responding to your request.
Request
Please let me know how many arrests and/or charges and/or convictions were made for the following murders:
Hugh Leonard Thompson Murphy, killed 16/11/82
Karen McKeown, died 16/10/82 (shot several weeks earlier)
William Nixon, died 26/09/82
Thomas Cochrane, abducted 22/10/82, body found 29/10/82
Please also give details of arrests/charges/convictions related to the killing of the following prison officers:
Brian Armour (04/10/88),
William McConnell (06/03/84),
Albert Miles (26/11/78),
Patrick Kerr (17/02/85)
Answer
Hugh Leonard Thompson Murphy, killed 16/11/82
Two persons were arrested. One of these persons was subsequently charged and convicted for other offences including; Possession of explosives, carrying an imitation firearm and contributing money for acts of terrorism. They received a 2-year prison sentence suspended for 3 years.
To date there have been no charges or convictions in relation to this murder case.
Karen McKeown, died 16/10/82 (shot several weeks earlier)
Five people were arrested however all were released without charge.
To date there have been no charges or convictions in relation to this case.
William Nixon, died 26/09/82
Five people were arrested however all were released without charge.
To date there have been no charges or convictions in relation to this case.
Thomas Cochrane, abducted 22/10/82, body found 29/10/82
To date there have been no arrests, charges or convictions in relation to this case.
Please also give details of arrests/charges/convictions related to the killing of the following prison officers:
Brian Armour (04/10/88)
One person has been arrested and charged in relation to this murder. They were convicted of aiding and abetting murder and were sentenced to life imprisonment.
William McConnell (06/03/84)
Eight people were arrested and charged with offences relating to this case.
Five of these persons were sentenced. Each person is discussed individually below;
Person 1 sentenced as follows: Murder - Life imprisonment, two counts of False imprisonment - 7 years imprisonment for each (concurrent), Possession of firearm with intent to endanger life - 14 years imprisonment (concurrent), two counts of Communicating information likely to be of use to terrorists - 8 years imprisonment for each (concurrent), and one count of Communicating information likely to be of use to terrorists – 9 years imprisonment (concurrent).
Person 2 sentenced as follows: Withholding information to prevent acts of terrorism - Bound over in the sum of £500 for 5 years – 5 years Imprisonment in lieu of any further offences committed, Impeding apprehension - 4 years imprisonment
(concurrent) to the above offence.
Person 3 sentenced as follows: Withholding information to prevent acts of terrorism – 12 months imprisonment, suspended 2 years.
Person 4 sentenced as follows: Murder - Life imprisonment, Possession of firearm with intent to endanger life - Life imprisonment, two counts of False imprisonment - 7 years imprisonment for each (concurrent), Hijacking property
- 3 years imprisonment (concurrent).
Person 5 found not guilty of murder, but was sentenced as follows: False imprisonment - 12 years imprisonment, Possession of firearm & ammunition with intent to endanger life - 12 years imprisonment, Possession of firearm & ammunition
in suspicious circumstances - 10 years imprisonment (concurrent).
Person 6 found not guilty of murder and of possession of firearms with intent.
Person 7 found not guilty of murder, two offences of possession of firearms with intent, two offences of false imprisonment and possession of firearms.
Person 8 Judge ordered the offences were not to be proceeded with without leave of the Court or the Court of Appeal.
Albert Miles (26/11/78)
Twelve people were arrested.
Two of these people were charged and convicted of murder and other offences and sentenced to life imprisonment. The ten other people arrested were released without charge.
One of sentenced persons escaped prison. They are still unlawfully at large but, under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement, is eligible to apply for early release to the Sentence Review Commission.
Patrick Kerr (17/02/85)
To date there have been no arrests, charges or convictions in relation to this case.
In relation to the names of the suspects, Police Service of Northern Ireland is providing an NCND response - please see below for full details.
Section 17(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires the Police Service of Northern Ireland, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which:
- states that fact,
- specifies the exemption in question and
- states (if not otherwise apparent) why the exemption applies.
The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) can Neither Confirm Nor Deny that it holds the information relevant to your request as the duty in Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply by virtue of the following exemptions:
Section 38 (2) - Health & Safety - The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with Section 1 (1)(a) would or would likely endanger the safety of an individual.
Section 40 (5B)(a)(i) – Personal Information - The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if to do so would contravene any of the data protection principles.
The full text of exemptions can be found at www.legislation.gov.uk and further guidance on how they operate can be located on the Information Commissioners Office website www.ico.org.uk.
‘Neither Confirm nor Deny’ (NCND)
There may be occasions when complying with the duty to confirm or deny under section 1(1) (a) would in itself disclose sensitive or potentially damaging information that falls under an exemption. In these circumstances, the Act allows a public authority to respond by refusing to confirm or deny whether it holds the requested information.
The decision to issue a ‘neither confirm nor deny’ response is not affected by whether we do or do not hold the information but relates to the consequences of confirming or denying the information is held. The starting point and main focus in most cases will be theoretical considerations about the consequences of confirming or denying that a particular type of information is held. The decision to neither confirm nor deny is separate from a decision not to disclose information and needs to be taken entirely on its own merits.
PSNI follow the Information Commissioner’s Guidance in relation to ‘NCND’ and you may find it helpful to refer to this at the following link:
https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1166/when_to_refuse_to_confirm_or_deny_section_1_foia.pdf
Section 38 is a prejudice-based, qualified exemptions which means the public authority must demonstrate the harm in confirming or denying that the information exists and carry out a Public Interest Test.
Section 40 is a Class-based exemption, therefore it is not necessary to evidence the harm caused by disclosure nor is it necessary to carry out a public interest test in this case.
Exemptions Explained
Section 40(5B)(a)(i) - Personal Information
The release of information under Freedom of Information (FOI) is a release into the public domain and not just to the individual requesting the information. Once information is disclosed by FOI there is no control or limits as to who or how the information is shared with other individuals, therefore a release under FOI is considered a disclosure to the world in general.
To confirm or deny that PSNI hold or do not hold information would in fact confirm information about an individual. This would amount to a release into the public domain of personal information about an individual and likely to cause distress. The individual would have no expectation that these details would be released into the public domain; therefore PSNI would breach its data protection obligations and be unfair to individuals.
Harm for NCND
Confirming or denying whether information is held regarding the identity of suspects would reveal whether specific individuals were or were not subjects of criminal investigation. Even where allegations or suspicions are historic, individuals connected to the offences remain at risk of retaliation, retribution or harm from individuals with ongoing grievances.
Confirming or denying the existence of such information could also undermine confidence in protective measures afforded to individuals who have not been publicly identified, and could create a precedent which may deter cooperation with law enforcement or legacy investigations.
Public Interest Test
Factors Favouring Confirmation or Denial – Section 38(2)
There is a recognised public interest in openness and transparency regarding historic criminal investigations. Disclosure could contribute to better public understanding of how these investigations have been conducted and assist in maintaining a public confidence in policing and investigative processes. There is also great public interest in accountability for serious crimes, particularly those involving loss of life.
Factors Against Confirmation or Denial – Section 38(2)
There is a strong public interest in protecting individuals from risk to their physical safety and wellbeing - confirming or denying information could expose individuals to reprisal attacks or community hostility. Disclosure could inflame tensions or cause distress to victims' families, communities or individuals linked to allegations. Individuals who have not been publicly charged have a legitimate expectation that their information will not be disclosed in a manner that could place them at risk. PSNI must maintain the ability to manage sensitive legacy information without compromising safety or operational integrity.
Balancing/Decision
Whilst there is a clear public interest in transparency and accountability regarding historic investigations, this must be balanced against the very strong public interest in safeguarding individuals and preventing harm.
Given the enduring sensitivities surrounding these offences and the real and evidenced risks of retaliatory violence and intimidation, PSNI considers the public interest in protecting health and safety significantly outweighs the public interest in confirm or denying whether this information is held.